Jump to content

- - - - -

Beware of floridization

  • Please log in to reply
23 replies to this topic

#1 Guest_diotch_*

  • Guest

Posted 06 August 2003 - 07:17 PM

tell ashcroft no more elections like the last one

#2 Guest_hippie3_*

  • Guest

Posted 07 August 2003 - 06:40 AM

i'd like to see a full copy of the act/law they oppose before i make a judgement.

#3 Guest_diotch_*

  • Guest

Posted 07 August 2003 - 06:09 PM

here ya go

#4 Guest_hippie3_*

  • Guest

Posted 09 August 2003 - 10:11 AM

man, i tried wadding thru that but jeez.
i'm no lawyer.
any synopsis i could read ?

#5 Guest_cleanjar_*

  • Guest

Posted 13 August 2003 - 12:04 PM

Eh cripes, I vote that nobody in Florida is allowed to vote anymore.

We will screw it all up again if we get the chance i can assure you.

It must be the Everglades that does this non-sense to Floridians...too much fresh swampy air.

Posted Image

#6 tralfaz



  • Expired Member
  • 4 posts

Posted 13 August 2003 - 12:31 PM

I think what the problem is with these computerized voting machines is that they are VERY suseptable to fraud. Many states have rejected versions that have been produced up to this point. If someone will tell me how to post links on this site, I will list some that are helpful in understanding the issue.

It is a VERY important issue if we wish to safeguard our democracy from any future election theft.

If someone would be so kind as to help me link: [email protected] ....and no, I don't live in australiaPosted Image

#7 Guest_diotch_*

  • Guest

Posted 13 August 2003 - 01:50 PM

to link just type and it should show as a link. and yes tralfz has the right idea. with these elctronic voting machines it is just too easy to rig them like you would a slot at a truckstop..... dirty. if the machine were to say give out a printout recipt showing what you voted so you could match it to the copy stored in the machine, or better yet a hardcopy printout that must be kept on file at all times it would be a bit beter but i still don't trust r2d2 to do my voting

#8 Guest_hippie3_*

  • Guest

Posted 14 August 2003 - 06:59 AM

it's always been easy to commit vote fraud,
i frankly don't see how computer voting could make anything worse than it already is.
no one can hand-count millions of votes and photo id every voter, etc. in a timely manner.
just hiring folks to watch over the process from both [all] factions is the best we can do.

#9 Guest_xylem_*

  • Guest

Posted 14 August 2003 - 07:40 AM

when you buy a candybar you get a receipt.
when you eat at a restaurant you get a receipt.
when you go to wal-mart and buy those wide mouth half pints you get a receipt.
you get a receipt when the repairman repairs your TV, when you purchase a money order, when you use the ATM.

your car has a title, a sort of receipt.
you can even get a receipt for your Big Mac.
even our very birth and death are recorded on paper, so why is it that the most important decision regarding our personal governance, regarding future policy at every level from local to national not come with some sort of paper trail for recursive action?

they do it in Germany, when they vote they get a receipt.

i want my reciept.

#10 Guest_hippie3_*

  • Guest

Posted 14 August 2003 - 07:43 AM

in america, votes are secret.
a receipt would determine if one voted,
but it could not say for whom.

#11 Guest_xylem_*

  • Guest

Posted 14 August 2003 - 08:13 AM

key encryption would answer that easily. 128bit encryption can take months to hack with thousands of man hours.

if i really have a right to vote, then i should have a right to know if that vote was counted. if that vote was thrown out i should have the right to know why and under whose authority. if that reason is because i did something wrong i want to know what i did wrong so i can do it right next time.

one argument against this could be that having such a paper trail would result in buying and selling votes, well i'm not sure this isn't happening, i just got a check from the treasury for a tax cut that the government cannot afford- just calling it like i see it.

if i cannot see for a fact that my vote was truly counted then the system has no true credibility. if i find that my vote has not been counted for invalid reasons there should be some right to recourse.

another crazy thing is the whoe Diebold conspiracy. that story broke out huge in Europe months ago, but we barely hear a peep here. i guess war makes better news -er, sorry, sells more burgers.

#12 Guest_hippie3_*

  • Guest

Posted 14 August 2003 - 08:25 AM

the sheer number of voters would make such a proposal economically prohibitively expensive.
and it would take months to verify every vote.
longer if we had to do it by hand.
what is the 'diebold conspiracy' ?

#13 Guest_xylem_*

  • Guest

Posted 14 August 2003 - 08:43 AM

for more on Diebold voting machines:



hustler parody of diebold:


more on "help america vote act:"

#14 Guest_hippie3_*

  • Guest

Posted 14 August 2003 - 08:53 AM

hmmm...lots of conjecture and speculation with very little hard data to indicate this really happened or even could happen.
both sides provide monitors to oversee the process of vote counting, so it seems unlikely to me that they would conspire with their own enemy.

#15 Guest_xylem_*

  • Guest

Posted 14 August 2003 - 09:13 AM

i understand hard facts are important, but there is also the unsaid that i take into consideration, yet it is still conjecture and accusation.

for example, a congressional rep local to Atlanta named Cynthia McKinney (i know she's not popular to some) was defeated in the democratic primary for the 2002 election by a Denise Majette, who was previously registered with the Republican party. Supposedly Majette was a republican and she decided to run as a democrat.

Well, McKinney would normally recieve about 78,000 votes in the primary, every time she ran for office. In 2002 near the end of the primary around 74,000 registered republicans decided to quit the republican party and register as democrats, then voted in the primary for who? well we don't know that at all but we do know that McKinney was defeated in that primary by Majette. who funded Majette's campaign? same folks that funded most of the other republicans running that year.

why? McKinney was a loud mouth about the Bush administrations close ties to the Carslyle group, they were trying desperately to push some combat vehicle that was proven by the pentagon and other independant sources to be a lemon and McKinney wanted to know why when she followed the paper trail it led to the Carslyle group, they owned the company that was making the vehicle.

so now in Georgia there are all of these extra Democrats, and Georgia has been a democrat stronghold for 130 years- there has not been a republican governor in GA for 130 years until 2002.

now comes Perdue.

how does all of this relate? well it doesn't factually, just speculation and conjecture, but i don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.

#16 shroomzhilla



  • Expired Member
  • 250 posts

Posted 14 August 2003 - 03:13 PM

in order to beat em(dems)join em. I have very little faith in anyone holding office any level these days

#17 Guest_xylem_*

  • Guest

Posted 14 August 2003 - 04:12 PM


#18 tralfaz



  • Expired Member
  • 4 posts

Posted 01 September 2003 - 01:37 AM


#19 Guest_tom_*

  • Guest

Posted 01 September 2003 - 08:40 AM

That what happens when you make a cerear out of politics. most all of our forfathers did politics on the side and had true jobs the rest of the time most of them were goods traders act.

#20 Guest_hippie3_*

  • Guest

Posted 02 September 2003 - 07:15 AM

the world is alot more complicated now.
ignorant farmers and shopkeeps are hardly qualified to judge matters of world trade, etc.

Like Mycotopia? Become a member today!